Rust Isn't the Future of Systems Programming – It's Just the Hype Cycle

a day ago

Copy Link

Rust is praised for memory safety, performance, and modern tooling but faces skepticism about its future dominance.
Criticism includes long compile times, with examples showing Rust can be 20x slower than C++ in trivial benchmarks.
The learning curve is steep due to complex concepts like ownership, borrowing, and lifetimes, which can overwhelm newcomers.
Rust's complexity and conventions may hinder mass adoption, especially in small or embedded systems where simplicity is key.
A decision tree suggests Rust is viable when memory safety is critical, but trade-offs may not justify its use in other scenarios.
Rust is currently in the 'Trough of Disillusionment' on the hype cycle, with real-world adoption struggles becoming apparent.
While Rust excels in niches like OS kernels and safety-critical code, it's unlikely to replace C or C++ broadly due to their entrenched ecosystems and simplicity.
The future of systems programming is seen as multi-language, with Rust being one of many tools rather than the sole successor.

Hasty Briefsbeta